As we mentioned in a previous article, Red Hat advocate Greg DeKoenigsberg claimed that due to the much larger amount of code it's contributed, Red Hat is a better open source citizen than Canonical, adding, "Canonical is a marketing organization masquerading as an engineering organization." A Computerworld blog retorts that that's no insult; and that marketing Linux could be just as important to the cause as contributing code. Updated

When I see the top contributors of kernel, X.Org, GNOME, etc. I think it's usually Red Hat who raises the bar most. Well of course the bar raises on all distributions thanks to Red Hat's way to contribute to projects.

Depends on what the contributions are.
Microsoft also contributed to Linux by adding support for their hypervisor. But did it benefit anyone else?
There are different types of contributions and RedHat is mostly interested in the server-side of things.